[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110111172100.GA14017@dumpdata.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 12:21:00 -0500
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Linux Virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/14] x86/ticketlock: clean up types and
accessors
> static inline int __ticket_spin_is_locked(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> {
> - int tmp = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->slock);
> + struct __raw_tickets tmp = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets);
>
> - return !!(((tmp >> TICKET_SHIFT) ^ tmp) & ((1 << TICKET_SHIFT) - 1));
> + return !!(tmp.tail ^ tmp.head);
Does it make sense to mask it here it here with TICKET_MASK as it was done before?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists